The anniversary of the Bialowieza collusion is a good reason to remember what the liberals motivated the destruction of a great country.
There are a lot of liberal myths - during the years of perestroika and the years of the so-called “reforms,” they wrote as many of them as the ancient Greeks probably could not come up with over the centuries of development of their Ancient Greece. Moreover, it did not occur to any of them to invent legends defaming Hellas. But in the patriotic mythology of liberal mythology there is nothing - on the contrary, the composers of fairy tales and fables seem to be competing with each other, who will hurt more painfully the country in which most of them were born - the USSR.
This topic has unexpectedly acquired a special urgency now because of Ukrainian events. After all, anti-Soviet myths are pushing thousands of residents of the Square to hold a rally, not knowing for what reason.
Someone may say that much of what will be given by me in response to liberal tales is obvious to them. But the paradox is that what is obvious to people with a Soviet mentality, for some reason, sometimes seems like an incredible sacrifice to capitalist education and liberal propaganda. So, voluntarily or involuntarily, one sometimes has to explain it for granted.
Actually, I will begin an analysis of the hot five tales about the great, but unfortunately, destroyed in Belovezhskaya Pushcha (today, by the way, we are celebrating the anniversary of this sad event) of the Soviet Union just with the fact that no one in those years doubted . In any case, before the beginning of the processes named by MS Gorbachev perestroika, which resulted in the strongest blow of enemies was directed in this direction.
So, the liberal myth №1 - the USSR was a "prison of nations", there was no friendship between them.
If the Soviet Union was a prison, then many nations gladly served their time in it. The Soviet government, in particular, gave many peoples in the Far North an opportunity to survive altogether.
The peoples of Central Asia were literally transferred in time from the Middle Ages into a completely industrial future. The whole country laughed at the funny adventures of Comrade Sukhov with the harem of Abdullah, and meanwhile, there was not enough ridiculous. The disenfranchisement of women, illiteracy, double oppression — local feudal lords and royal rulers — that is Turkestan before the revolution. And unfortunately, now in many respects there is a rollback in a number of republics to that distant and not very distant past.
Supposedly the occupied Baltic states, which they don’t like to remember, voluntarily became part of the USSR. Someone will say that not without coercion - not without it. But here Finland, for example, did not want to be part of it and did not enter, so historically the ways-roads are not as simple as many people think. In the USSR, the Baltic republics acquired industry. Everyone remembers the RAF, Dzintars and many other brands, as they would say now.
And the impoverished Moldavia, being in the “prison of nations”, was a prosperous republic, no matter how surprising it may seem to someone now. The fact is that for many years the “main occupier” worked there - personally, dear Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev himself.
Well, prosperity of the Caucasian republics. languishing, ostensibly in the dungeons of the empire, envied by all. Caucasian resorts are the dream of every Soviet vacationer.
The most happy went to the Crimea, presented only once in stories humanity "metropolis" (Russia) "colony" (Ukraine) as a sign of eternal friendship. Precisely her want to break up some associations (or rather, hallucinations) with the European Union. However, nothing will come of it - all the peoples of the USSR remember that great friendship of the peoples that was then.
Liberal myth №2 - The USSR was a colossus on feet of clay, whose leadership allowed itself to be drawn into an arms race, which led to the collapse of 1991.
In the arms race, the parties were not originally in an equal situation. In the 1946 year, when after the speech of Winston W. Churchill in Fulton, the Cold War began, our country literally lay in ruins. 27 of millions of victims, many thousands of cities and villages in the European part wiped out from the face of the earth, uncountable material losses - that was the price of victory in World War II, but otherwise we would have lost it and the whole world would have been struck by the brown plague of Nazism .
The United Kingdom, of course, also suffered from the German bombing, but the scale of the losses was incommensurable. As for the USA, they, as you know, fought, with the exception of the Hawaiian Islands, on foreign territory.
Nevertheless, the bloodless USSR had no other choice than to create its own nuclear missile shield under the most difficult conditions, which was done. Otherwise, we would just be destroyed. Americans in the Soviet years, declassified their plans. In their directive from 14 December 1945, when the battlefields, where the Russians and Americans fought together against the Nazi Nazis, had not cooled, the atomic bombing of the Soviet cities 20, including Moscow and Leningrad with all the inhabitants, their spiritual and historical monuments, was already planned.
So the USSR was forced against the will of its own to enter the cold war, which more than once offered to end. All those who lived in the Soviet era remember how L.I. Brezhnev mumbled endlessly about detente, peaceful coexistence, the need for general disarmament. The response of the United States and NATO as a whole became more and more new rounds of the arms race.
The ruinous arms race, of course, played a role in the destruction of the Soviet Union, but its ill-considered actions by M.S. Gorbachev and his entourage with the so-called restructuring.
Liberal Myth No. XXUMX - USSR collapsed on its own, in Belovezhskaya Pushcha they just stated his political death
Of course, one could simply recall V. Mayakovsky, who believed that the stars light up, if it is necessary for someone, and if they are extinguished, then there definitely wasn’t without someone's ill will. The USSR was not just a star, but a whole socialist galaxy.
In 1985, when Gorbachev came to power, the situation in the Soviet Union was not two. but five orders of magnitude more stable than now in the post-Soviet space. Despite economic difficulties and a slowdown (not a crisis, but a slowdown in the pace of development), the country was on the rise. And here the reformist itch began - the Gorbachevs decided to change what worked perfectly in the streamlined national economy. The result is an economic crisis. Gorbachevites launched a rash anti-alcohol campaign. The result is dissatisfaction with the widest sections of the population. Finally, under the guise of glasnost, unrestrained anti-Soviet agitation in the media began. The result is a spat upon the country's history, the loss by many people of faith in socialism.
And so unshakable, it would seem, as the Sphinx, the country reeled. Inter-ethnic unrest began, separatists of all stripes raised their heads. Finally, inside the CPSU is no longer hidden, but the former zealots of communism have directly identified themselves as ardent opponents of everything Soviet and socialist.
But the apotheosis of betrayal is the signing of the very Belovezhsk agreements. Yeltsin and Shushkevich, who did this, not only violated the country's Constitution, but also the results of the referendum. Kravchuk could hide behind the results of the repeated referendum on the territory of Ukraine. Although the big question is why it should have been carried out just six months after the All-Union.
Liberal myth №4 - the Soviet people did not protest against the destruction of the USSR in Belovezhskaya Pushcha
As for the fact that people almost indifferently perceived the death of their homeland - this, of course, to put it mildly, is not true. 17 March 1992, on the anniversary of the referendum on the preservation of the Union, on Manezh Square in Moscow gathered the so-called "National Assembly" - a rally organized by the communist and patriotic movements. A lot more people came to him than to modern liberal actions, although less so than before B.N. Yeltsin.
Often there were the same people: many of them changed their attitudes to sharply negative ones in just a year. There were two reasons for this: “shock therapy” in the economy and the signing of unconstitutional Belovezhsk agreements.
So people expressed their protest against the violation of their will in a referendum on one of the most popular actions in the history of Russia. And how could they not express it if the collapse of the USSR caused three wars on its territory at once - in Nagorno-Karabakh, in Transnistria and Abkhazia ?! Another thing is that the liberal propagandists, at first, hardly noticed the thousand-year-old “National Chamber”, calling the action “red-brown”, and then simply “forgotten” about it. And so a fairy tale was born about a people who silently contemplated how they destroyed their homeland.
Were those who welcomed the breakup of a great country? Unfortunately yes. Then the enemies of our Motherland triumphed, who achieved their goal - the country of the Soviets was destroyed. However, the aspiration of peoples to unity, no boundaries is not an obstacle. Sooner or later, the fraternal alliance in one form or another will be restored.
Liberal Myth No. XXUMX - It is better for Russia to live separately from the former fraternal republics and to all is better in the Commonwealth of Independent States than in one "communal apartment" of the USSR
It is this, if I may say so, argument, along with the supposedly original lack of viability, that the opponents of the Soviet Union put forward, justifying the signatories of the Belovezhskaya agreements. Unfortunately, it really seemed to many at that time that it would be beneficial for Russia to remain alone, because after a divorce from the national republics, the main reserves of oil, gas and many other mineral resources remained precisely on Russian territory. As for the CIS, it seemed to other credulous (especially since the masters of the masters of television arts so inspired) that this is nothing more than a change of sign, the rebranding of the USSR, so to speak.
In reality, everything turned out to be completely different. Over the years, the CIS has become an increasingly ephemeral community, eventually becoming only a sign that is very rarely remembered. The participants of the Commonwealth themselves unwittingly proved its virtuality, offering outside its framework other integration options, first of all, the Customs Union, the Eurasian, the CSTO.
Lost from the death of the Soviet Union all the republics, including Russia. After all, the USSR controlled Baku oil and Turkmen gas, which would now make it even more confident to feel on the strategically important energy market. And how painful it was for the Russian economy to break up the collapse of generations of connections — it is even difficult to assess.
A stream of migrants poured into our country. And this is also a direct consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union - people simply do not have work in their native places, so they are ready to sell their labor for pennies and live in inhuman conditions. As a result, the criminogenic situation worsens, and consequently, everyone loses. And therefore everyone is also interested in the revival of this union instead of the ephemeral CIS.
Most of the USSR?
I am almost on 100% sure that if a referendum on preserving the USSR was now held again, the majority of citizens of the Russian Federation, and many other former Soviet republics, would have spoken the same way as 17 in March 1991, that is, “Yes” . Not only the older and middle generations who remember the words of the Soviet anthem, “And the Red Banner of the Glorious Motherland, we will always be faithful!”, But also those who were born years and even decades after its destruction in Belovezhskaya Pushcha.
In the capitalist realities, boys and girls are more and more interested in the time when their parents were like them, and grandmothers and grandfathers, like now fathers and mothers. Why? Because many of them would also like to live in a society where there are no beggars and oligarchs, where murder is an emergency, and not an ordinary event in the criminal chronicle, where your country is respected and hoped for all over the world, where the cost of a ticket to the 5 institute cents, well, the most important thing is where the vast majority of people skillfully make friends without looking at each other’s material and social situation.